About your Search

20130117
20130125
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
of the president and the furtherance of american foreign policy. i'll have some questions later on policies and your views, including how you explain to world leaders how you could have been rooting for the boston red sox instead of what the world knows as the new york yankees as the team of the world, but let me say, mr. chairman, it's been a pleasure working with you and looking forward to continuing to work with you in the issues you've championed over the years. fighting global terrorism, preventing the spread of nuclear biological, chemical weapons, fighting for human rights and against hiv-aids around the world, fighting crime, corruption, drug trafficking and standing up, as you always have, for the interest of the foreign service around the world. in your role, should you will be confirmed, and i know you will, your portfolio will be greatly expanded, you will represent the interests of all of us, from securing our embassies and protecting our overseas personnel to promoting commerce, enhancing cross-cultural ties and keeping america secure through cooperation, where possible, and i
should be our foreign policy, keeping gadhafi empower, is that four or in opposition to american interests? i don't get them as issues' notebook. those are policy issues. i'm mainly concerned with regime issues. but you take your point, i am making a distinction between the democratic sovereignty and so i guess they don't have an objection to the overthrow of the burmese government. it would have an objection is a policy, i don't think to be a good policy to change every country in the world i am not advocating not in any sense. we can argue about different policies. i'm saying is a form of government, the liberal democratic nationstate is superior to other forms of government. one would be global governance. others isn't autocratic regime. i talk about russia and china has autocratic regimes than i do see any problem pushiness countries in a democratic direction, not by force, the public affairs and so on would be an acceptable policy. we could do it or not do it is a policy decision. of course there is radical islam, which establishes sharia as the constitutional structure and
justice. dr. king was a fierce critic of foreign policy in the vietnam war. in his beyond vietnam speech, which he delivered at the york's riverside church, 1967, a year before the day he was assassinated, dr. king calledll the united states the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today. "time" magazine called the speech demagogic slander that sounded like a script for radio hanoi. today, we let you decide. we play an excerpt of dr. king's speech, beyond vietnam. >> after 1954, they watched us conspire to prevent elections which could have surely brought ho chi minh to power over the united vietnam and they realized they had been did -- betrayed again. when we asked why they do not leap to negotiate, these things must be remembered. also it must be clear that the leaders of hanoi considered the presence of american troops in support of the diem regime to have been the initial military breach of the geneva agreements concerning foreign troops. and they remind us that they did not begin to send troops in large numbers and even supplies, and to the south, until american forces had mo
foreign policy and american values and interests to every leader around the world. you have changed the face of america abroad and extended the hospitable reach of our nation to ordinary citizens in addition to world leaders. during your tenure you have steered us through economic crisis in europe, changing relations with asia, regime change in the arab world are a mow moen to us transition in -- momentous transition in libya and global strength based on economics, rather than arms. i personally appreciate the fact you used your office to aggressively implement sanctions against iran. in addition to these priorities and nearly every trip which you have i think the most traveled secretary in history you also supported, met with and provide ad voice to those individuals that don't live in the limelight. women, children, the lgbt community and religious minorities. made a real difference in the personal lives of so many people and for that you have the thanks of a grateful nation. i know you will not go gently from the world stage and i look foreward to working closely with you in the
's foreign policy. the foreign policy is what difference does it make? hey, what difference does it make if we give our sworn enemies, people who want to wipe israel and us off the map, so we give them the method to wipe them out? what's the big deal? >> brian: what do you say to people who say hue bark wasn't a benevolent dictator even though he was good to us. should we have not been giving egypt aid all those years? >> we were not interfering with the internal situation in these countries, but mubarak had agreements with this country. this administration throws our allies under the bus. they've done it with the northern alliance that fought the taliban in afghanistan. they did it with poland. we'd deal with them for defensive weapons. they've done it repeatedly and as a west african told me when i was over there a couple of years ago, he said, we were so excited when you elected a black president. but please, tell people in washington stop getting weaker. the world sees you getting weaker! don't do that. you put us in jeopardy. we're putting ourselves in jeopardy when we're sending je
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)